Treatment of Carotid Restenoses after Endarterectomy: A Retrospective Monocentric Study

Ann Vasc Surg. 2020 Apr:64:43-53. doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2019.10.103. Epub 2020 Jan 7.

Abstract

Background: To compare the different techniques for the treatment of carotid restenosis after carotid artery endarterectomy (CAE).

Methods: Among 1,218 carotid surgeries carried out in our center between January 2010 and November 2017, 45 procedures were performed for carotid restenosis after CAE, including 11 by iterative conventional surgery and 34 with endovascular techniques (7 transluminal angioplasties alone [TLA], 9 carotid artery stenting [CAS], and 18 angioplasties with active balloons [drug-coated balloon {DCB}]). Perioperative data (cumulated rate of morbimortality [CRMM], duration of hospitalization) and postoperative results (survival, symptomatic restenoses > 50% or asymptomatic stenoses > 70% on ultrasound, reinterventions) were collected retrospectively and analyzed with Fisher's exact test. The long-term results were estimated according to the Kaplan-Meier estimator and were compared with the log rank test (P < 0.05 was regarded as significant).

Results: There was one secondary death due to a massive postoperative stroke in the endovascular (ENDO) group. No significant difference regarding CRMM (2.9%, P = 0.756) between the iterative conventional surgery (open surgery; OS) and the ENDO groups of was observed. Three hematomas were found in the OS group versus one in the ENDO group (P = 0.04). The length of hospital stay was shorter in the ENDO group (P < 0.001). No difference was found between the ENDO group and the OS group regarding the two-year survival or the survival without recurrent restenosis (86 vs. 100%, log rank = 0.804, and log rank = 0.114). There were 5 restenoses >70% and two reinterventions in the ENDO group (P > 0.05). The comparison of the different endovascular techniques did not show significant differences regarding the CRMM, the one-year overall survival, the survival without recurrent restenosis, or the survival without reintervention (89% in the DCB and CAS groups vs. 100% in the percutaneous transluminal angioplasty [PTA] group, log rank = 0.286; 87% in the DCB group vs. 100% in the PTA and CAS groups, log rank = 0.137; and 94% in the DCB group vs. 100% in the PTA and CAS groups, log rank = 0.585, respectively).

Conclusions: In our experience, endovascular procedures are equivalent to iterative conventional surgery for the treatment of carotid restenoses in terms of major complications, news restenoses, or survival with less hematoma and a shorter duration of hospitalization. We however could not identify the best endovascular strategy in this indication, and a controlled study comparing the various endovascular strategies is proposed.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study

MeSH terms

  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • Angioplasty* / adverse effects
  • Angioplasty* / instrumentation
  • Angioplasty* / mortality
  • Angioplasty, Balloon* / adverse effects
  • Angioplasty, Balloon* / instrumentation
  • Angioplasty, Balloon* / mortality
  • Carotid Stenosis / diagnostic imaging
  • Carotid Stenosis / mortality
  • Carotid Stenosis / physiopathology
  • Carotid Stenosis / surgery*
  • Coated Materials, Biocompatible
  • Endarterectomy, Carotid* / adverse effects
  • Endarterectomy, Carotid* / mortality
  • Female
  • France
  • Humans
  • Length of Stay
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Recurrence
  • Reoperation
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Risk Factors
  • Stents
  • Time Factors
  • Treatment Outcome
  • Vascular Access Devices
  • Vascular Patency

Substances

  • Coated Materials, Biocompatible